> Hm... - from a logical point of view, the first loop uses a static > count, > while the latter loop always has to check the value of i and we have > to > increment manually... > > Although my tests show something different ?:-o > Mine too--can this be right?
test -- 7251 -- "100 / 5 / 10001" test2 -- 16 -- "100 / 5 / 10001" test -- 7252 -- "100 / 5 / 10001" test2 -- 16 -- "100 / 5 / 10001" That means manually incrementing the counter is 450 times faster than the static loop? That's totally counter-intuitive--and even if the static loop is actually slower, how can it be that much slower? I ran this test on a Mac PowerBook G3 Bronze, D 8.5, System 9.1. I get similar results on Windows ME--6160 vs. 13. Does it have to do with the triple-nested loop, I wonder? I'm going to run some more tests. Cordially, Kerry Thompson [To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to http://www.penworks.com/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED]). Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
